USPTO serial 76474788
SOMBRERO MEXICAN FOOD
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 603
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- GAYNOR, BARBARA ANNE
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 115 - EXAMINING ATTORNEY ASSIGNED
What this means
This page summarizes the public USPTO record for this serial number, including owners, goods and services, and prosecution history.
Need help with SOMBRERO MEXICAN FOOD?
If you own this trademark, we can monitor new filings and help with USPTO deadlines. If you do not, we can file a new U.S. application.
Current trademark owner
Monitor this mark, or talk with CopyMark about this registration.
Not the owner?
File a new U.S. trademark application, or speak with our attorneys.
Owner
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Gregory M. Garrison
GREGORY M GARRISON GARRISON & MCINNIS, LLP2650 CAMINO DEL RIO N STE 108SAN DIEGO, CA 92108UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 043 | Mexican food restaurants | ACTIVE | — |
Related trademarks
CopyMark links this record to cited §2(d) serials, the owner's other marks, Nice classes, similar mark names, and recently changed USPTO applications.
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| May 16, 2005 | MAB3 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Apr 26, 2005 | ABN3 | ABANDONMENT - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Apr 26, 2005 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Feb 3, 2005 | RECD | ACTION DENYING REQ FOR RECON MAILED | — |
| Feb 3, 2005 | CNCF | ACTION CONTINUING FINAL - COMPLETED | — |
| Jan 15, 2005 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Jan 11, 2005 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Jan 10, 2005 | EXAF | EXPARTE APPEAL RECEIVED AT TTAB | — |
| Jan 3, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jun 28, 2004 | CNFR | FINAL REFUSAL MAILED | A final Office Action (final refusal) means the examining attorney is maintaining at least one refusal and your options are narrower. You can file a response addressing the refusal, appeal to the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, or let the application abandon. |
| May 13, 2004 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| May 13, 2004 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Jan 9, 2004 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Jan 9, 2004 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Jan 9, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Nov 24, 2003 | ABN2 | ABANDONMENT - FAILURE TO RESPOND OR LATE RESPONSE | The trademark application was abandoned because a required response or document was not filed by the deadline — usually a missed Office Action response. The application is dead unless a petition to revive is granted within a limited time. |
| Nov 17, 2003 | NAUD | NOTICE OF UNRESPONSIVE AMENDMENT - MAILED | — |
| Oct 29, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Sep 29, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 29, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Mar 24, 2003 | CNRT | NON-FINAL ACTION MAILED | A non-final Office Action means the USPTO examining attorney has raised at least one issue with your trademark application but has not made a final decision. You usually have three months to respond with arguments, amendments, or evidence. Missing the deadline can abandon the application. |
| Mar 17, 2003 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Mar 17, 2003 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |